ライフサイエンスコーパス: kin

1 ime and found that authors who are part of a kin tend to occupy central positions in their collaborat

2 nes have different relatednesses to affected kin.

3 d between spouses and biological and affinal kin; and (4) knowledge of plant uses associated with for

4 e propose that long-term pair bonds, affinal kin recognition, exogamy, and multi-locality create ties

5 al benefit to nearby clonemates and allowing kin selection to favor public good production.

6 Although kin and kind discrimination are increasingly appreciated

7 Although kin recognition is a fundamental mechanism through which

8 kin is more important than competition among kin for young prairie dogs.

9 onse to more intense local competition among kin.

10 rns probably occur because cooperation among kin is more important than competition among kin for you

11 ompetition decreases inclusive fitness among kin, Hamilton and May predicted that the presence of nea

12 lso generate preferential interactions among kin, thus stabilizing multicellular lifestyles.

13 interference competition for nutrients among kin, at the cost of a slower maximum growth rate.

14 on hinders the evolution of altruism amongst kin when beneficiaries gain at the expense of competing

15 c, including both anti-pathogen activity and kin recognition.

16 support a role for facultative cheating and kin selection in the evolution of quorum-sensing diversi

17 when a network exhibits triadic closure and kin labels than when it does not.

18 nisms: kin priming through communication and kin assistance with childcare.

19 s of Bim, increases apoptosis of WT, D-, and kin-S49 cells, whereas inhibition of cAMP-mediated induc

20 icity, ensuring that nonkin are excluded and kin are included, is critical and depends on the number

21 extensive cranial pneumaticity of T. rex and kin but does possess the highly derived brain and inner

22 Self and kin discrimination are observed in most kingdoms of life

23 Sociality is a derived trait, and kin discrimination exists in sub-social closely related

24 tions, the mitochondrial structure of WT and kin(-) S49 cells is similar.

25 icantly differed in abundance between WT and kin(-) S49 cells.

26 nd morphologic studies of wild-type (WT) and kin(-) (PKA-null) murine S49 lymphoma cells.

27 Just as kin build potent academic networks with their own resour

28 ose in whom one has a fitness stake, such as kin and allies, is a key adaptive problem for many organ

29 ble to key evolutionary adaptations, such as kin detection.

30 n but can be protected by mechanisms such as kin discrimination.

31 the absence of well known mechanisms such as kin interactions, reciprocity, local dispersal or condit

32 tionary transitions, than mechanisms such as kin selection, direct and indirect reciprocity.

33 y, which protects other individuals, such as kin.

34 Children born in a new union are asymmetric kin of children born in a previous union.

35 rilineal and patrilineal kinship (asymmetric kin).

36 pleiotropic effects on fitness of asymmetric kin).

37 lecular and theoretical aspects of bacterial kin recognition.

38 differentiating affiliation behavior between kin and non-kin.

39 s to facilitate cooperative behavior between kin, suggesting that these systems may have other roles

40 However, the distinction between kin and non-kin-with kin detection being a key evolution

41 ng data from competition experiments between kin discriminating strains of Myxococcus xanthus and Pro

42 anding of demarcation line formation between kin-discriminatory populations, and can be used for anal

43 known to detect facial similarities between kin in the faces of third parties, and there is some evi

44 onsequences of this trade-off depend on both kin selection and biochemical constraints.

45 early humans may have formed ties with both kin and non-kin, based in part on their tendency to coop

46 , females with higher numbers of co-breeding kin did not increase energy income but biased energy all

47 Greater numbers of co-breeding kin had a positive effect on the number of offspring wea

48 the effects of co-breeding and non-breeding kin on the fitness and energy allocation balance between

49 s of ecological knowledge and thereby buffer kin against environmental hardships [7, 8].

50 (Acrocephalus sechellensis) are mitigated by kin-selected (genetic relatedness) or mutualistic (socia

51 who share genes for helping, as specified by kin selection theory.

52 ediate apoptotic cell death in WT S49 cells, kin(-) cells resist this response because of lower level

53 Close kin provide many important functions as adults age, affe

54 stems that restrict fusion to self and close kin.

55 developing when they are surrounded by close kin.

56 When individuals marry close kin, we find that (i) both husbands and wives have sligh

57 lly limited to familiar group members--close kin, mates, and reciprocating partners.

58 avored between individuals who are not close kin but share a "greenbeard" gene for altruism?

59 tates may have unequal availability of close kin and that this gap in availability will widen in the

60 g that colonies only fuse with self or close kin.

61 The ability to recognize close kin confers survival benefits on single-celled microbes

62 When the subject and her partner were close kin no such effect was observed.

63 The inability to cooperate with close kin, due to their absence, prompts a search for a new te

64 liances, and/or sharing paternity with close kin.

65 This perspective allows us to combine kin selection and reciprocal altruism into a general mat

66 nderstanding mother-offspring communication, kin recognition, and mate choice.

67 ze and low relatedness of these communities, kin directed.

68 m for how groups beget new groups comprising kin.

69 of cooperation, empiricists should consider kin selection and reciprocal altruism together rather th

70 In contrast, kin-S49 cells (which lack PKA) show no cAMP-promoted cha

71 Our finding that bacteria sense damaged kin and respond via a widely distributed pathway to moun

72 For the past four decades kin selection theory, based on the concept of inclusive

73 and social status each played a role, as did kin dynamics and familiarity.

74 ped with an evolvable probability to discern kin from non-kin.

75 is not sufficient to precisely discriminate kin.

76 bacterium Bacillus subtilis to discriminate kin from nonkin in the context of swarming, a cooperativ

77 Kin recognition, the ability to distinguish kin from non-kin, can facilitate cooperation between rel

78 To distinguish kin from nonkin, mate from nonmate and food from nonfood

79 dependent inhibition proteins to distinguish kin from nonkin.

80 in part on facial similarity to distinguish kin.

81 n individuals that are socially close (i.e., kin and affiliation partners) and was more typical of fe

82 es social effects that do not require either kin or kind, such as mutualism and manipulation.

83 al plasticity among individuals encountering kin or genetically diverse neighbourhoods.

84 ispersion) = -0.82 per thousand, and epsilon(kin)(biodegradation) = -2.15 per thousand.

85 equ)(sorption) = -0.31 per thousand, epsilon(kin)(transverse-dispersion) = -0.82 per thousand, and ep

86 enefits of farming go to already established kin groups.

87 This study firmly establishes kin discrimination in a bacterial multicellular setting

88 uggesting interstrain variation in the exact kin discrimination mechanism used.

89 ography) and cryptic structure (for example, kin structure).

90 Dictyostelium cells exhibit kin discrimination--a potential defense against cheaters

91 mpsia cespitosa - a species known to exhibit kin recognition via root exudation - to investigate the

92 er offspring, rendering relatedness favoring kin selection less critical.

93 at intermediate levels of promiscuity favour kin discrimination.

94 Co-breeding female kin ground squirrels maintain close nest burrows, likely

95 ness, lower risks of infanticide from female kin and greater protection of territorial boundaries may

96 tion if the resulting traits benefit fertile kin, and that worker traits provide the primary mechanis

97 which uses the dual-purpose TraA protein for kin recognition and outer membrane and lipoprotein excha

98 h Hamilton's rule, indicating a key role for kin selection in the evolution of cooperative investment

99 Friends may be a kind of "functional kin." Finally, homophilic genotypes exhibit significantl

100 onment, is sufficient to repeatedly generate kin-discriminatory behaviors between evolved populations

101 ently manipulate sharing of putative genetic kin recognition markers, with the animal itself or known

102 tions and to higher frequencies with genetic kin recognition as shared greenbeard traits.

103 their genealogical relatives, which may give kin-selected benefits for cooperation.

104 les at many key points, such as within-group kin discrimination and mechanisms to actively repress co

105 thereby gaining indirect benefits by helping kin.

106 body of experimental work that addresses how kin-selected social behaviours affect virulence.

107 We show how kin selection and reciprocal altruism can promote cooper

108 However, kin selection models poorly predict patterns of caste-bi

109 philic cell surface receptor that identifies kin based on similarities in a polymorphic region, and t

110 for the detection of chemicals that identify kin and conspecifics.

111 poptosis involves an increase in Bim, but in kin(-) cells, Dex-promoted cell death appears to occur b

112 By contrast, in kin(-) cells, expression of PKA-RIalpha and Bim is promi

113 Differences in kin recognition mechanisms also can have consequences fo

114 Therefore TraA functions in kin recognition and, in turn, OME helps regulate social

115 demonstrate a direct role for these genes in kin discrimination.

116 Here, we describe their role in kin discrimination.

117 gradient fractionation, we show here that in kin(-) S49 cells PKA-Calpha is not only depleted but the

118 tion and stability of cooperation, including kin selection, pleiotropic constraints, and metabolic pr

119 onetheless, resume full cooperation with its kin when it is fixed in the population.

120 to the viewing population, thereby kindling kin-motivated responses (for example, prosocial behavior

121 tality is relatively high, more so in larger kin groups.

122 using facial similarity to recognize likely kin, and there is evidence that nonhuman primates are al

123 tive measure of facial similarity in macaque kin.

124 telomere attrition when living next to male kin.

125 als in a community seek to live with as many kin as possible, within-camp relatedness is reduced if m

126 ible influence of mothers and other maternal kin on male reproductive success in patrilocal societies

127 l male life histories and access to maternal kin as key factors influencing variation in paternal--an

128 is possibly due to two proximate mechanisms: kin priming through communication and kin assistance wit

129 s perhaps provides protection against nearby kin bacteria in which the old effector was not replaced.

130 nd May predicted that the presence of nearby kin should induce the dispersal of individuals from the

131 Consistent with our model, negative kin discrimination is restricted to eviction attempts of

132 e use game theory to show that such negative kin discrimination can be explained by selection for unr

133 o evolve even in populations with negligible kin structure and no synergies.

134 m social ties to individuals who are neither kin nor mates, and these ties tend to be with similar pe

135 capable of resistance; dominants exhibit no kin discrimination when attempting to evict younger fema

136 s may have formed ties with both kin and non-kin, based in part on their tendency to cooperate.

137 However, the distinction between kin and non-kin-with kin detection being a key evolutionary adaption

138 ing affiliation behavior between kin and non-kin.

139 Explanations of cooperation between non-kin in animal societies often suggest that individuals e

140 and many examples of cooperation between non-kin probably represent cases of intra-specific mutualism

141 onbreeding females direct help away from non-kin female pups to preserve future breeding opportunitie

142 uffer against territorial invasions from non-kin ground squirrels.

143 Discrimination of kin from non-kin has been observed in swarms of the bacterium Bacillu

144 ion, the ability to distinguish kin from non-kin, can facilitate cooperation between relatives.

145 volvable probability to discern kin from non-kin.

146 ls with conflicts of interest (including non-kin) can be strategically viable, but only in animals th

147 ss to lay down one's life for a group of non-kin, well documented historically and ethnographically,

148 show that protracted exposure to kin or non-kin odorants changes the number of dopamine (DA)- or gam

149 inating 'self' or kin from 'non-self' or non-kin strains.

150 al hundred warriors and participants are not kin or day-to-day interactants.

151 and size and loss of cristae) in WT, but not kin(-) cells.

152 nd proton efflux are decreased in WT but not kin(-) cells.

153 WT, but not kin(-), S49 cells incubated with the cAMP analog 8-(4-ch

154 eal discrimination is actually of kinds, not kin, as in poison-antidote systems, such as bacteriocins

155 When an opponent was not kin, agents evolved strategies that were similar to thos

156 enerally, our results confirm the ability of kin selection theory to explain the biology of eusocial

157 In the absence of kin selection, reciprocal altruism may be an evolutionar

158 Previous accounts of kin classification have often emphasized constraints tha

159 ged and disadvantaged in the availability of kin support.

160 t with dominance rank or the availability of kin.

161 could not be substituted by any category of kin or nonkin.

162 ever, the evolutionary origins and causes of kin-discriminatory behavior remain largely obscure.

163 udation - to investigate the consequences of kin interactions for root litter decomposition and negat

164 ocks, and to investigate the consequences of kin structure for the risk of inbreeding during the bree

165 Discrimination of kin from non-kin has been observed in swarms of the bact

166 poor fit to the complexity and diversity of kin interactions in humans.

167 The indirect evolution of kin discrimination in an asexual microbe is analogous to

168 breeding, a prerequisite to the evolution of kin-based cooperation.

169 ion-diffusion models for colony expansion of kin-discriminatory strains.

170 Behaviors which support the fitness of kin provide indirect benefits in the form of evolutionar

171 eproductive females may boost the fitness of kin through the transfer of ecological knowledge.

172 One form of kin discrimination observed in microbes is the failure o

173 resistance mechanism constituting a form of kin selection whereby a small number of resistant mutant

174 Diverse forms of kin discrimination, broadly defined as alteration of soc

175 human cooperation evolved in small groups of kin and familiar individuals.

176 nge of reproductive partners among groups of kin.

177 We demonstrated the importance of kin effects on a fundamental life-history trade-off.

178 with phylogenetic relatedness, indicative of kin discrimination.

179 rgely focussed on measuring the influence of kin on reproduction in natural fertility populations.

180 ith significant vs non-significant levels of kin structure.

181 between different strains as a mechanism of kin discrimination, but it is not clear whether this kil

182 cooperation with kin, but the mechanisms of kin discrimination are largely unknown.

183 This includes mechanisms of kin selection, single-cell sensing of nutrient depletion

184 We thus provide a plausible genetic model of kin selection that leads to the stable coexistence in th

185 ined by statistical gene frequency models of kin selection.

186 However, the next of kin (NoK) decline to consent in 43% of cases-the second

187 nfronted with raised expectations of next of kin and the necessity to provide early predictions of lo

188 Eleven of 30 screened patients and 9 next of kin completed study procedures.

189 in 251 missed potential donors whose next of kin could not be approached regarding organ donation bec

190 is-induced locked-in state and their next of kin in a fully unbiased manner using eye-tracking comput

191 ontacting patients with CRC or their next of kin in five states.

192 ts by interviewing survivors and the next of kin of nonsurvivors, reviewing medical records, and anal

193 In the initial phase, next of kin of patients from five VA Medical Centers were contac

194 In a cohort of bereaved next of kin of patients who died in the intensive care unit, we

195 ondents were aware that consent from next of kin or family is sought for all deceased organ donation.

196 Next of kin rated their own or patients' QoL similarly, but they

197 In 438 cases where next of kin was approached, consent rates reached 47.5%.

198 Following 107 patient deaths, 51 next of kin were successfully contacted and 41 (80%) agreed to s

199 mental and private programs that pay next of kin who give permission for the removal of their decease

200 to Jan 1, 2011, through contact with next of kin, collection of death certificates, and searches of t

201 informed consent postmortem from the next of kin.

202 o be at the cost of the QoL of their next of kin.

203 dings reveal an early evolutionary origin of kin discrimination and provide insight into the mechanis

204 theses regarding the evolutionary origins of kin discrimination.

205 Pairs of kin strains were able to cocolonize roots and formed a m

206 atorial effect derived from this plethora of kin discrimination genes creates a tight relatedness cut

207 Our analyses revealed that pooling of kin groups could lead to highly variable levels of F(IS)

208 We asked whether the presence of kin might act on energy allocation, a central aspect of

209 alls, which are thought to be the product of kin or individual selection (e.g., [10, 11]).

210 ings provide direct evidence for the role of kin recognition in cheater control and suggest a mechani

211 ther thorough experimentation on the role of kin selection in the evolution of virulence and identify

212 I find that, whilst Hamilton's rule of kin selection can be readily derived under the assumptio

213 ism to sustain the evolutionary stability of kin-recognition genes and to suppress cheating.

214 jor insights of inclusive fitness studies of kin selection.

215 a leading role in development and testing of kin selection theory.

216 possible to develop a quantitative theory of kin selection upon the assumption of blending inheritanc

217 By eliminating the gene from the theory of kin selection, I clarify the role that it plays in the t

218 vely collected survey data from 1985 next-of-kin surrogates of Health and Retirement Study (HRS) part

219 otential brain-dead donors and their next-of-kin, and these data highlight the need for further resea

220 conditions and beyond the mother-offspring, kin or pair bond broadens the generality of the social b

221 unt explains several specific constraints on kin classification proposed previously.

222 This protection depends on kin-recognition-mediated segregation because it is compr

223 ay of thinking about and modeling effects on kin.

224 lution but current understanding focusses on kin selection (inclusive fitness).

225 y did Darwin fail to develop his insights on kin selection into a proper theory of social adaptation?

226 se to CPT-cAMP treatment of WT but not D- or kin- S49 cells.

227 ight participate in discriminating 'self' or kin from 'non-self' or non-kin strains.

228 use older daughters, grandmothers, and other kin and nonkin may provide significant childcare.

229 on the relatedness of interacting parasites (kin selection), which, in turn, is predicted to affect t

230 to allosteric agents even among phylogenetic kin.

231 resistance, the usual prediction of positive kin discrimination can be reversed.

232 asitoid wasps without invoking or precluding kin selection effects.

233 family of OME-delivered toxins that promote kin discrimination of OME partners.

234 benefits of cooperation result in pronounced kin discrimination and nepotism in many social species a

235 ation, In contrast, CPT-cAMP did not protect kin(-) cells or WT cells treated with the PKA inhibitor

236 rve to facilitate inter-sexual provisioning, kin provisioning, and risk reduction reciprocity, three

237 s for cooperation and altruism--reciprocity, kin and group selection, and punishment--are not directl

238 more general processes such as reciprocity, kin selection, and multi-level selection acting on genes

239 The ability to recognize kin is an important social skill for primates.

240 The ability of bacteria to recognize kin provides a means to form social groups.

241 to bacterial diversity, genetic relatedness, kin selection theory, and mechanisms of recognition.

242 exploiting other clones by high relatedness, kin discrimination, pleiotropy, noble resistance, and lo

243 direct effect on fitness and do not require kin selection or a special group structure.

244 ocation of its unneeded food to the infant's kin, offsetting the fitness cost of the death and weaken

245 l traits, without requiring group selection, kin selection, or reciprocity.

246 per capita productivity, stable group size, kin structure and stability of the social group.

247 ties of being present in other relatives, so kin selection could act on them differently.

248 Even so, kin(-) cells undergo apoptosis in response to treatment

249 m is consequently deemed to require stronger kin selection, or trait-selected synergies, or elastic p

250 We show computationally that kin classification systems in the world's languages achi

251 We therefore conclude that kin may influence the progression to a second birth.

252 Further, we find that kin discrimination pervasively evolves indirectly betwee

253 of interpopulation discrimination imply that kin discrimination phenotypes evolved via many diverse g

254 Recent theory proposes that kin selection may modulate female harm by relaxing compe

255 Furthermore our data reveals that kin recognition in birds can develop without any associa

256 Here we show that kin recognition protects cooperators against cheaters.

257 nepotism in the social species suggests that kin discrimination has been lost or is irrelevant in com

258 contextual cues of kinship can influence the kin-recognition system more directly, changing how the m

259 solated from renal tissue of a member of the kin who died while on renal dialysis.

260 iffers from those of known mammals and their kin.

261 by which postreproductive females help their kin remain enigmatic.

262 ters and victims that differed only in their kin-recognition genes, tgrB1 and tgrC1, and in a single

263 r environment to protect themselves or their kin from parasitism.

264 ving conflict over territorial space through kin-selected or mutualistic pathways can reduce both imm

265 stimation in levels of relatedness, and thus kin structure.

266 combined with the known benefits conveyed to kin by post-reproductive females can explain why killer

267 We show that protracted exposure to kin or non-kin odorants changes the number of dopamine (

268 This logic extends to kin other than grandmothers.

269 This limits germline stem cell predation to kin, as the locus has hundreds of alleles.

270 Two explanatory variables related to kin influence significantly increase the odds of a femal

271 repertoires, but in this case in response to kin selection favoring sharing of information among rela

272 isms that regulate prosocial behavior toward kin.

273 g lowest toward strangers and highest toward kin.

274 that humans act more altruistically towards kin.

275 urther imply a potential for greenbeard-type kin recognition to create arbitrary runaway social selec

276 tomic, and bioinformatic analyses to uncover kin recognition factors in this organism.

277 es by facultative cheating can persist under kin-selection conditions that select against "obligate c

278 successes and failures mirror the underlying kin recognition mechanisms.

279 ic loci that allow recognition of unfamiliar kin have proven elusive.

280 m and reproductive skew within groups unless kin recognition constraints or group-level selection is

281 Swarming bacteria use kin discrimination to preferentially associate with thei

282 This suggests that P. chabaudi parasites use kin discrimination to evaluate the genetic diversity of

283 to show that sterile castes could evolve via kin selection, in which a gene for altruistic sterility

284 We visualize kin selection as non-random interactions with like-strat

285 Kin selection theory predicts that, where kin discrimination is possible, animals should typically

286 behavior of outer membrane exchange, wherein kin share outer membrane contents.

287 w-fertility population, by analysing whether kin affect parity progression in the British Household P

288 wever, greatly reduce the threshold at which kin selection promotes cooperation, and vice-versa.

289 possible genetic mechanisms associated with kin discrimination and cheating behavior during asexual

290 gical detail while remaining consistent with kin- and multilevel selection frameworks.

291 sexual behaviour in a manner consistent with kin-selection theory.

292 f chimerism by preferential cooperation with kin, but the mechanisms of kin discrimination are largel

293 favouring the evolution of cooperation with kin.

294 ilarity of male song-phrases correlates with kin in both time and frequency parameters, while, for fe

295 ies showed benefits of communal feeding with kin, indicating nepotistic cooperation.

296 the distinction between kin and non-kin-with kin detection being a key evolutionary adaption-is often

297 benefits of the public good are shared with kin and that cooperative investment is, despite the larg

298 When food is shared only within kin groups, an infant death permits reallocation of its

299 Those without kin report higher rates of loneliness and experience ele

300 uctive individuals to the fitness of younger kin.